Rousau`s theories of the social contract together form a single and coherent vision of our moral and political situation. We are naturally endowed with freedom and equality, but our nature has been corrupted by our quota social history. However, we can overcome this corruption by invoking our free will to reconstitute ourselves politically according to strongly democratic principles, which is good for us, both individually and collectively. In moral and political philosophy, the social contract is a theory or model that was born in the Age of Enlightenment and generally concerns the legitimacy of state authority over the individual.  Social contract arguments generally postulate that individuals have agreed, either explicitly or implicitly, to give up some of their freedoms and submit to authority (of the sovereign or the decision of a majority) in exchange for the protection of their remaining rights or the maintenance of social order.   The relationship between natural and legal rights is often a subject of social contract theory. The term takes its name from the social contract (in French: Du contrat social ou principes du droit politique), a work by Jean-Jacques Rousseau from 1762 that discussed this concept. Although the precursors of social treaty theory are found in antiquity, Greek and Stoic philosophy, and Roman and canon law, the pinnacle of the social contract was the mid-17th to early nineteenth century. Century, when it turned out to be the dominant doctrine of political legitimacy.
The objective of the social contract is to ensure the common or greater well-being in order to ensure the sustainability of the system in question and to protect individuals. As such, the social contract usually conducts moral behaviors. For example, according to our implicit agreement, it is wrong to commit acts that harm others, such as theft, fraud, attack or false testimony. According to Locke, the state of nature is not a condition of individuals, as is the case with Hobbes. On the contrary, it is populated by mothers and fathers with their children or families – what he calls “conjugal society” (para. 78). These societies are based on voluntary agreements to care for children together, and they are moral, but not political. Political society is created when men representing their families come together in the state of nature and agree that everyone should give up executive power to punish those who transgress the natural law and hand over that power to the public power of a government. After doing so, they are subject to the will of the majority. In other words, by making a pact to get out of the state of nature and shape society, they make “an organ politically under a government” (para. 97) and submit to the will of that body. One adheres to such a body, either from its beginnings or after it has already been created by others, only by explicit consent.
After creating by their consent a political society and a government, people receive three things that they lacked in the state of nature: laws, judges to judge laws, and the necessary executive to enforce those laws. The theory of an implicit social contract is that people, by remaining in the territory controlled by a society that normally has a government, give their consent to join that society and be governed, if at all, by their government. . . .